When military defeat is inevitable, propaganda becomes the weapon of choice—crafted to distort reality, dismiss evidence, and manipulate global perception. Pakistan, reeling from the significant damage inflicted during India’s Operation Sindoor, which struck terrorist camps and key military infrastructure, has once again resorted to false narratives to cover up its setbacks. In doing so, it has found willing amplifiers in segments of the international media with a known ideological tilt.
Bloomberg Echoes Pakistani Propaganda, Draws Criticism from Indian Public
A case in point is Bloomberg’s article published on May 13, titled “Chinese Weapons Gain Credibility After Pakistan-India Conflict.” The piece lent credence to Pakistan’s baseless claims that it shot down five Indian fighter jets, including advanced Rafales, without presenting a shred of verifiable evidence. By repeating such unsubstantiated assertions, the publication inadvertently contributed to the spread of disinformation, echoing Pakistan’s long-standing strategy of turning fiction into perceived fact.
“Pakistan hailed the use of its Chinese J-10C jets to shoot down five Indian fighter aircraft, including French-made Rafales, last week in retaliation to Indian military strikes. Although these claims remain unverified and India has not issued any statement, the manufacturer of the Chinese jets saw its market capitalisation surge by over 55 billion yuan ($7.6 billion), or more than 25 per cent, by the end of the week,” the Bloomberg article states.
That Bloomberg would publish a narrative aligning with Pakistan’s unsubstantiated claims is not entirely surprising. This particular piece, which uncritically amplifies Pakistani propaganda while praising Chinese defence systems without evidence, was authored by two Chinese nationals, Josh Xiao and Yian Lee, raising valid concerns about its objectivity and intent.
As Indians began questioning Bloomberg’s credibility and calling out its biased reporting, the publication quietly added the name of Sudhi Ranjan Sen as a co-author alongside the original Chinese writers, Josh Xiao and Yian Lee. This move appeared to be an attempt to lend legitimacy to the piece by including an Indian byline, effectively using a local face to endorse what many see as blatant Chinese propaganda. Archived versions of the article confirm that Sen’s name was not part of the original byline. Indian social media users have been vocal in condemning what they view as a clear instance of agenda-driven journalism and shameless misinformation by Bloomberg.
Moreover, Pakistan’s Chinese-made air defence systems were effectively rendered useless during Operation Sindoor. India not only struck terrorist infrastructure deep inside Pakistani territory, but also successfully targeted Pakistani air bases and radar installations with drones and missiles, facing minimal resistance. These are not unverified claims or social media chatter; they are supported by credible satellite imagery and objective evidence.
NYT’s Skewed Coverage of Operation Sindoor
The New York Times, another left-leaning media outlet, previously amplified Pakistan’s unverified claims of having shot down five Indian warplanes—including three Rafale jets, one MiG-29, and one Su-30—as well as a drone. Despite Pakistan’s failure to present any credible evidence, such as wreckage images or videos, the NYT chose to legitimise the narrative by quoting John E. Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org. Pike speculated that the aircraft and drone “could have been downed” by either surface-to-air or air-to-air missiles, simply because “Pakistan has both.” This conjecture was presented despite the complete absence of proof, even as social media was flooded with visuals confirming India’s successful strikes within Pakistani territory.
In contrast, India released high-resolution satellite imagery and detailed evidence clearly showing the precision and impact of Operation Sindoor on Pakistani terror and military infrastructure. Faced with undeniable proof, the New York Times eventually shifted its tone—but not without downplaying the scale and success of India’s retaliatory operation.
In its article published on May 14, titled “India and Pakistan Talked Big, But Satellite Imagery Shows Limited Damage”, The New York Times reported that while both India and Pakistan deployed hundreds of drones and missiles to test each other’s air defenses and strike military targets, it was India that inflicted the most significant damage on Pakistani military facilities.
New York Times own story says India inflicted significant damage and Pakistan's claims lack evidence.
Yet the headline, as usual, is crafted to downplay India’s success pic.twitter.com/8wMIfob32W
— Abhinav Rajput (@Abhinavrt) May 15, 2025
“But an examination of satellite imagery indicates that while the attacks were widespread, the damage was far more contained than claimed — and mostly inflicted by India on Pakistani facilities,” The New York Times reported.
While the NYT’s decision to acknowledge India’s successful strikes over Pakistani targets surprised many, the publication still managed to reflect its familiar anti-India bias. The report went on to amplify Pakistan’s unverified claims of shooting down Indian fighter jets, citing unnamed “officials and diplomats” who allegedly confirmed that at least two Indian jets were downed. But which officials and diplomats? Pakistani ones? The credibility of such claims is questionable at best, especially when Pakistan’s own Defence Minister, Khawaja Asif, when pressed for evidence, merely responded: “It’s all over the social media.”
France24’s Biased Narrative
While the role of the media is to report facts and provide analysis, France24 seems more focused on delivering one-sided verdicts, often resembling a PR outlet for countries in desperate need of false praise to cover up their shortcomings. Amplifying Pakistan’s baseless claims of downing Indian Rafale jets, France24 asserted that Pakistan’s “robust response” to India’s attacks, featuring Chinese-made J-10 fighter jets, marked a “victory for China in terms of perception.” Like many Western media outlets, France24 misinterpreted India’s refusal to confirm or deny the loss of fighter jets as an inadvertent validation of the Pakistani-Chinese narrative. However, India’s silence was not an endorsement of these claims—it was a strategic decision, as Operation Sindoor was still ongoing.
Sources used in article
1. according to Pakistan’s top diplomat.
2. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar told parliament later that day.
3. Pakistan’s claim – Chinese social media platform, Weibo
4. Yun Sun, director of the China Program
5. Reuters article written by paki https://t.co/bQc05BenZO— Mountain Rats (@mountain_rats) May 15, 2025
The article further serves as a PR piece for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and President Xi Jinping, highlighting his leadership in modernising China’s defence capabilities. France24 quoted Chinese or pro-China ‘experts’ to create a fabricated narrative suggesting that India’s defences are somehow less effective than China’s. This, despite the fact that India successfully neutralised Chinese defence systems in Pakistan during the strikes, rendering them inoperative for a period and effectively shattering China’s carefully cultivated image of ‘invincibility.’
Reuters Echoes Pakistan’s Fabricated Claims of Downed Jets
On May 7, Reuters published a report titled “Three fighter jets crashed in India’s Jammu and Kashmir, local govt sources say”, citing ‘local sources’ to claim that three Indian fighter jets had crashed in Jammu and Kashmir. The report went further, quoting a Pakistani military spokesperson who asserted that the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) had shot down Indian fighter jets.
Two days later, on May 9, Reuters recycled these unfounded claims, publishing a story titled “Pakistan’s Chinese-made jet brought down two Indian fighter aircraft, US officials say”. The article claimed that two anonymous US officials told Reuters that Pakistan had used Chinese fighter jets to down the Indian aircraft. But who were these US officials? Why the anonymity? It’s clear that the Western media is complicit in amplifying the pro-Pakistan and pro-China narrative, even when facts and evidence overwhelmingly favour India. Notably, this Reuters report was authored by Idrees Ali and Saeed Shah, both Pakistani journalists, raising further questions about the report’s credibility.
Global Experts Praise India’s Decisive Victory in Operation Sindoor
John Spencer, a military veteran and head of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute in New York, has described India’s Operation Sindoor as a decisive victory. In several social media posts and his popular podcast, Spencer stated, “After just four days of calibrated military action, it is objectively conclusive: India achieved a massive victory.”
In a detailed article shared on X, Spencer emphasised that “Operation Sindoor met and exceeded its strategic objectives—destroying terrorist infrastructure, demonstrating military superiority, restoring deterrence, and unveiling a new national security doctrine. This was not symbolic force. It was decisive power, clearly applied.”
Spencer pointed to the April 22 Pahalgam attack, noting, “Unlike previous attacks, India didn’t wait. It didn’t appeal for international mediation or issue a diplomatic demarche. It launched warplanes.”
Referring to the operation as a swift and precisely calibrated military campaign, Spencer added that Prime Minister Narendra Modi made the new national security doctrine unmistakably clear: “India will not tolerate any nuclear blackmail. India will strike precisely and decisively at terrorist hideouts developing under the cover of nuclear blackmail.”
Walter Ladwig, a senior lecturer in international relations at King’s College London and an expert on South Asian security, told The Washington Post that India’s strikes represented “the most extensive Indian air attacks on Pakistani military infrastructure since the 1971 war.”
William Goodhind, a geospatial analyst at Contested Ground, a research project that tracks armed conflict using satellite imagery, stated, “High-profile targets were hit in precision strikes aimed at severely degrading Pakistan’s offensive and defensive air capabilities,” as reported by The Washington Post.
While Pakistan’s military has offered little more than inflammatory rhetoric and vague ‘center of gravity’ jargon, India, on the other hand, has presented concrete evidence—satellite imagery, before-and-after impact visuals, and detailed technical data from Operation Sindoor. While the pro-Pakistan propaganda machinery may have initially misled the international community, the truth is now emerging. It is becoming increasingly clear that India inflicted damage on Pakistani terror and military infrastructure far beyond what the Pakistani military and political establishment had anticipated.
Comments